evidence against flight 93 shoot down

[TC329]

Ah, so the NTSB is in on the conspiracy too.

there is no proof the ntsb knew they were given a fake fdr.

 

[leftysergeant]

please explain why the little white plane witnessed ....is incapable of successfully intercepting an airplane.

[twoofer mode]Where are the pieces of THAT little white plane? HUH? WHERE ARE THE PIECES? DISINFO![/twoofer mode]

 

[PhantomWolf]

[twoofer mode]Where are the pieces of THAT little white plane? HUH? WHERE ARE THE PIECES? DISINFO![/twoofer mode]

Where's the youtube footage of the plane? No youtube footage, no plane.

 

[1337m4n]

Let me know by way of private message when TC, RedIbis, and metamars actually get around to posting all this evidence they supposedly have.

 

[beachnut]

there is no proof the ntsb knew they were given a fake fdr.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=122665 Miller debunks TC

You make up lies. The FDR is not fake. Your ideas are fake. Miller debunks you clearly.

Please present clear evidence the FDR is fake, and your sound off the hills is not flying over, it is reflected sound. Too bad none of your witness who said the heard 93 over the lake, did not see 93 over the lake. Too bad the RADAR data show 93 else where.

You have made up ideas, I have solid evidence. Miller corrected all your errors in your video of him, but you did not figure it out.


http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=122665 TC misses the fact Miller's testimony rules out shoot down! Irony

 

[PhantomWolf]

I'm sure they'll post it right after sending a copy to KSM's lawyers

BTW:

Just for the CT Crew, here's the Name and Business information of his Lawyer. (This is public information)

Prescott L. Prince
5511 Staples Mill Road
Richmond, VA 23228

Phone: (804) 261-6101

 

[TC329]

1. susan mcelwain said it definitely wasn't a corporate jet.

2. rick chaney said it definitely wasn't a corporate jet.

3. dale browning saw it but he denies ever seeing anything now.

4. you think lee purbaugh thinks it was a corporate jet?

5. please name the eyewitness in shanksville that will say "i saw a white corporate plane on 9/11". please i beg you. i will pound on their door and beg them to go public.

6.i got a thousand dollars right now that beachnut cannot and will not name a shanksville resident listed in the media as seeing the white plane who will say they saw a corporate jet on 9/11.

7.some are brave like susan mcelwain and rick chaney and will speak publicly about it [the little white plane]and some are not. but they all agree with what susan mcelwain describes. even rick chaney. the difference is rick chaney thought there was a person in it. when i asked him if the plane was big enough to accomodate passengers he laughed and said no. he believed there was a person on board. thats it. it couldn't accomodate passengers, it wasn't big enough to.

8.why don't you mention how members of this forum contacted the authors at the tribune review who stand by their story?

9. the only way debris ended up at indian lake marina and new baltimore was if it was created in the air and landed there. both of these are in the opposite direction of the blast trajectory.

10. a massive jet fuel explosion lifted pieces of mail that were inside of the explosion so high up that the wind carried it 8 miles away and none of the mail was incinerated unlike passengers, remains, and aircraft debris.

11.jet fuel = hot enough to weaken steel skyscrapers in new york to cause them to collapse but not hot enough to burn us mail and bandanas in shanksville.........

12.you can listen to susan mcelwain and wally miller and then listen to people like beachnut telling you you're too stupid to understand what you just heard with your own ears.

13.beachnut is a firm believer of if you repeat it enough times people will take it as truth.......

14a.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfR4YchCwLQ
you can watch that and compare pop mechanics flight 93 crash to wally millers and let me know if they are similar or not.

14b.you can also see the media take susan mcelwain and manipulate and twist her story in order to support beachnuts fantasy corporate plane. if she wasn't such a credible witness then why is the history channel tracking her down and editing her testimony?

15.in fact you lie continuosly about wally. you lie about his description of the crash and say he supports the official story because he doesn't understand he's contradicting it because the government fabricated one.

16. you act as if his belittlement of no plane/no bodies theories is the same as he treats the shoot down. the shoot down he doesn't mock. the shoot down he doesn't want to discuss about the plane he says was brought down "allegedly" [did you hear him say that?] because of a struggle on board and then later on in the interview admits he doesn't know what caused the plane to come down. yeah sounds like he has no doubt about the official story at all, huh?

 

[Corsair 115]

there is no proof the ntsb knew they were given a fake fdr.

So, you're saying the NTSB is too incompetent to notice when they've been given a fake? Shouldn't that make you concerned when it comes to them investigating transportation accidents? After all, the results of their investigations are used to make recommendations as to how the rules of the airline industry should be changed to enhance safety.

If they're so incompetent as to not be able to recognize a fake data recorder, then this means all their accident investigations are likely subject to the same incompetence. In which case whatever recommendations they may have made would probably be totally wrong.

So, when are you going to advocate for the dissolution of the NTSB and its replacement with a competent invesigative organization?

 

[332nd]

Talking about 93 CTs on History channel now.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

AS always, 9/11 crackpots relying on the weakest form of evidence in order to dismiss the most reliable forms of evidence. And these crackpots don't seem to understand why they are not taken seriously.

Yes some bystander with no understanding of planes catches a glimpse of a plane that they don't personally think was a corporate jet, but NTSB experts who spend their careers studying FDRs wouldn't know if an FDR is real or not.

How can one not laugh at this absurd nonsense?

 

[beachnut]

1. susan mcelwain said it definitely wasn't a corporate jet.

Yes, we know if flew right over, as in just over her SUV, under the wires. lol, TC says it was a drone, the size of a SUV. Flying feet above the SUV; under the wires. wowzer

2. rick chaney said it definitely wasn't a corporate jet.

So, he is could be wrong. Darn. But he saw a jet, a white jet, oops, just like the Falcon 20. Oops.

3. dale browning saw it but he denies ever seeing anything now.

Oh, your list is getting thin.

4. you think lee purbaugh thinks it was a corporate jet?

Was it white.

5. please name the eyewitness in shanksville that will say "i saw a white corporate plane on 9/11". please i beg you. i will pound on their door and beg them to go public.

You are not looking for a Falcon 20, it would destroy your fantasy and lies. I got the FAA and the pilot, they beat your witnesses and your faulty logic.

6.i got a thousand dollars right now that beachnut cannot and will not name a shanksville resident listed in the media as seeing the white plane who will say they saw a corporate jet on 9/11.

I have the FAA; you lost anyway.

7.some are brave like susan mcelwain and rick chaney and will speak publicly about it [the little white plane]and some are not. but they all agree with what susan mcelwain describes. even rick chaney. the difference is rick chaney thought there was a person in it. when i asked him if the plane was big enough to accomodate passengers he laughed and said no. he believed there was a person on board. thats it. it couldn't accomodate passengers, it wasn't big enough to.

Funny stuff you don't have a clue how to use witness statements, and you ignore the RADAR data, ATC, FAA, and the pilot who flew the plane. You call the pilot a liar. You say 93 was shot down, the FDR proves you wrong, you are now telling a lie. Simple stuff.

8.why don't you mention how members of this forum contacted the authors at the tribune review who stand by their story?

What story? You are using news reports as facts and evidence. Real good.

9. the only way debris ended up at indian lake marina and new baltimore was if it was created in the air and landed there. both of these are in the opposite direction of the blast trajectory.

WRONG, the blast trajectory was south! The wind was 298 at 24 knots, the paper was over New Baltimore in 3 minutes. Sad, but then you are not good with directions, and you and Balsoma are not math guys. Created in the air? Funny guy. The things found were from the blast and fire, the were taken on the wind. Miller showed you the wind direction in the video, it was taking the debris to both place. Busted again.

10. a massive jet fuel explosion lifted pieces of mail that were inside of the explosion so high up that the wind carried it 8 miles away and none of the mail was incinerated unlike passengers, remains, and aircraft debris.

Metal parts do not float on at 24 knot wind. sorry, you need to study science more. You are showing your ignorance on science now. Do you have any experience in aircraft accident investigation, this is what happens in accidents.

11.jet fuel = hot enough to weaken steel skyscrapers in new york to cause them to collapse but not hot enough to burn us mail and bandanas in shanksville.........

Sorry, even in NYC a passport was ejected and found. If you would take that aircraft accident investigation course you would not be making so many errors.

12.you can listen to susan mcelwain and wally miller and then listen to people like beachnut telling you you're too stupid to understand what you just heard with your own ears.

Miller debunks TC. It is funny he does not understand it. http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...y+miller&hl=en Miller debunking TC and shoot down.

13.beachnut is a firm believer of if you repeat it enough times people will take it as truth.......

Cool, but you wasted time typing this and could left all your real evidence somewhere else.

14a.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfR4YchCwLQ
you can watch that and compare pop mechanics flight 93 crash to wally millers and let me know if they are similar or not.

Does not matter. I doubt you understand either.

14b.you can also see the media take susan mcelwain and manipulate and twist her story in order to support beachnuts fantasy corporate plane. if she wasn't such a credible witness then why is the history channel tracking her down and editing her testimony?

A corporate jet is a fact. Sorry, but now you are telling lies by saying others are telling lies. How many people are telling lies about the corporate jet? Only 9/11 truth and you are making fantasy about this. You call the pilot a liar; and have to call ATC, FAA, and many other liars to have your lie work. Failure is yours, you have zero proof. You ignore reality to make up your own story, based on faulty witness interpretations due to your lack of skills in investigation and use your own opinions.
So TC says the FDR is fake but it matches FAA records, which he has to say are fake too, and the pilot flying the white plane confirmed by the FAA and witnesses is a liar.

Everyone who proves TC wrong is a liar. Miller also proves TC is a liar and Miller is backed up with the FDR.

15.in fact you lie continuosly about wally. you lie about his description of the crash and say he supports the official story because he doesn't understand he's contradicting it because the government fabricated one.

Sorry, Miller clearly debunks your shoot down lie, and you don't understand it. It is your interview, and you missed it. Irony.

16. you act as if his belittlement of no plane/no bodies theories is the same as he treats the shoot down. the shoot down he doesn't mock. the shoot down he doesn't want to discuss about the plane he says was brought down "allegedly" [did you hear him say that?] because of a struggle on board and then later on in the interview admits he doesn't know what caused the plane to come down. yeah sounds like he has no doubt about the official story at all, huh?

Miller said you have to talk to other to quote mine the shoot down. He knew it was mistake as you pushed your failed "opinion" of a shoot down. He does not want more idiots on the internet saying he said something and twisting it. But you have already tired to twist Millers interview. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfR4YchCwLQ Good job getting the interview, but it destroys your shoot down, and is backed up by the FDR.

Yes the FDR you have never proved was fake, you just say it is was. No evidence so you talk about me; cool

more reality and discussion of 9/11; you don't have to buy a DVD to understand 9/11
http://www.debunk911myths.org/
http://www.911myths.com/index.html
http://www.debunking911.com/index.html

 

[A W Smith]

Dom. No shoot down. There is absolutely no wreckage north of the impact crater. Miller testifies to this in your own video. he draws the wreckage boundary line on the manila folder in your interview. the wreckage if from the impact crater south by south east. You cannot shoot off parts of the plane before impact and have it overfly the wreckage. If must hit the ground before the plane does. and finally, Show me a drone plane that can fly as fast as 500 MPH, Do you understand the concept of intercept?

 

[WildCat]

Talking about 93 CTs on History channel now.

I have the DVR set for the later showing, footbal first!

 

[metamars]

You cannot shoot off parts of the plane before impact and have it overfly the wreckage.

Wrong. Have you read the thread? Also, why don't you try posing the problem of how a plane, originally with two engines, could possibly hit the ground before 1 of it's former engines does, to a child? Maybe some little kid can help you out.

 

[332nd]

I have the DVR set for the later showing, footbal first!

I just have recall for now.

 

[WildCat]

Wrong. Have you read the thread? Also, why don't you try posing the problem of how a plane, originally with two engines, could possibly hit the ground before 1 of it's former engines does, to a child? Maybe some little kid can help you out.

So you think one engine would keep flying off on its own after it was shot off?

What planet do truthers live on?

 

[beachnut]

Wrong. Have you read the thread? Also, why don't you try posing the problem of how a plane, originally with two engines, could possibly hit the ground before 1 of it's former engines does, to a child? Maybe some little kid can help you out.

Your post makes no sense.

No engine fell of in the air; the plane stuck the ground and part of the engine was found near the pond south of the impact.

The other post was right. If the engine is shot off it falls down, does not travel with the plane, it falls. The plane was flying, not falling down. Alas, the engine was no lost.

 

[1337m4n]

So you think one engine would keep flying off on its own after it was shot off?

What planet do truthers live on?

You misunderstand his delusion. metamars believes that if one of the plane's engines broke off, the entire plane would INSTANTANEOUSLY plunge into a 90-degree nose dive, and the tiny amount of residual thrust from the remaining engine would cause it to outrun the engine that broke off.

Of course, this crackpot idiocy requires (in addition to waiving the laws of physics) that the wing be broken off with the engine, otherwise the pilot would have attempted to glide into a crash landing which would certainly be more survivable than a nose dive into the ground. But if the wing were broken off, then there would be a largely intact wing section at the crash scene. Oops.

metamars, like most Truthers, is not thinking when he invents his ideas. In particular he needs to look up conservation of momentum; he demonstrates that he does not understand it (didn't he say he was a PHYSICS major? You won't get very far in physics without learning conservation of momentum, metamars).

 

[Bobert]

Truthers demand 95% of plane parts, so I am going to use the same standards and demand 95% of missile parts. Truthers where are the missile parts?

EXACTLY!
Maybe the missle was one of those disappearing missles fired out of that Death Star thingy that fired the space beam that brought down the towers.

 

[lee5]

To the truthers that believe 93 was shot down... will you please tell me what a crash would look like if a plane hit the ground @ 500mph at the same angle as 93?

A detailed description or picture would be fine.

Thanks in advance.